"The Bloomberg Collection?"
Bloomberg is described as "outraged," but I suppose they could respond, "so sue us."
Personally...I am not that keen on colored guns. But to each their own. After all, the right to expression has been ruled inherent in the first amendment, and the right to keep and bear arms in explicit in the second amendment. And I don't recall any restrictions on color for arms.
I guess this is really just an ironic twist-of-fate for our wealthy and influential friend Michael. Sure, he can whine and moan about how the "rich gun lobby and industry" is stooping to a new and dangerously pathetic low, mocking his "good for the people" common sense gun laws and by claiming outlandish things such as Lauer marketing guns to children.
But really, the lesson here is bigger than that....as they should have learned in the wake of the 1994 semi-auto ban, maybe the gun controllers will learn something this time. Nothing....nothing sells the public on guns, and nothing sells guns to the public, more than gun bans. The irony of it all.
Posted by: Carl in Chicago at March 22, 2008 07:13 PM
They don't call him "Nanny Bloomberg" for nothing.
Posted by: Letalis Maximus, Esq. at March 22, 2008 07:49 PM
Pink guns are really not my taste....but the only thing I'd rather see dura-coated pink other than a gun is hizzoner, hisself.
Posted by: Flighterdoc at March 22, 2008 07:51 PM
Bloomberg is not outraged. Outrage, even when misplaced is an honest emotion. There isn't a drop of honesty anywhere in that sonofabitch.
He is merely playing to the "club".
Posted by: straightarrrow at March 22, 2008 11:49 PM
Ron Lauer's got some real fight in him.
During the early days of 2006 he was shipping in 'off-list' AR receivers into CA (thru CA FFLs, of course) in spite of initimdation from Calif DOJ Firearms Div - at a time when other vendors of AR receivers were cowed by incorrect (illegal) pronouncements from Calif DOJ Firearms Division.
Hats off to the Lauers.
San Jose CA
Posted by: Bill Wiese at March 23, 2008 03:37 PM